法政匯思
2015年9月21日
Chen Zuoer, Chairman of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macau Studies, remarked yesterday that Hong Kong had since the handover failed to implement de-colonisation “in accordance with the law” and also allowed de-sinicisation, which caused damage to the “One Country, Two Systems” status quo.

While we leave debates open on the political definition of “de-colonisation” as quoted by Mr Chen, whether “de-colonisation” actually took place in Hong Kong and whether it is a positive development, we note that the Basic Law has not sought to eliminate the pre-existing colonial system in Hong Kong prior to the handover. On the contrary, the whole “One Country, Two Systems” framework under the Basic Law was designed to preserve the system in place during colonial rule. The relevant provisions include:

– Article 8: “The laws previously in force in Hong Kong, that is, the common law, rules of equity, ordinances, subordinate legislation and customary law shall be maintained, except for any that contravene this Law, and subject to any amendment by the legislature of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.”

– Article 9: “In addition to the Chinese language, English may also be used as an official language by the executive authorities, legislature and judiciary of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.”

– Article 100: “Public servants serving in all Hong Kong government departments, including the police department, before the establishment of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, may all remain in employment and retain their seniority with pay, allowances, benefits and conditions of service no less favourable than before.”

– Article 110: “The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall, on its own, formulate monetary and financial policies, safeguard the free operation of financial business and financial markets, and regulate and supervise them in accordance with law.”

– Article 136: “On the basis of the previous educational system, the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall, on its own, formulate policies on the development and improvement of education, including policies regarding the educational system and its administration, the language of instruction, the allocation of funds, the examination system, the system of academic awards and the recognition of educational qualifications.”

– Article 137: “Educational institutions of all kinds may retain their autonomy and enjoy academic freedom.”

– Article 142: “The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall, on the basis of maintaining the previous systems concerning the professions, formulate provisions on its own for assessing the qualifications for practice in the various professions. Persons with professional qualifications or qualifications for professional practice obtained prior to the establishment of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region may retain their previous qualifications in accordance with the relevant regulations and codes of practice.”

– Article 144: “The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall maintain the policy previously practised in Hong Kong in respect of subventions for non-governmental organisations in fields such as education, medicine and health, culture, art, recreation, sports, social welfare and social work. Staff members previously serving in subvented organisations in Hong Kong may remain in their employment in accordance with the previous system.”

– Article 145: “On the basis of the previous social welfare system, the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall, on its own, formulate policies on the development and improvement of this system in the light of the economic conditions and social needs.”

In addition, the Basic Law does not stipulate the need to change the names of places currently named after figures from the colonial period.

In fact Basic Law does not actually mention “de-colonisation” at all.

As to whether there have been any so-called “de-sinicisation” in Hong Kong, we leave this political topics to others. However, we note that during his meeting with the participants at an international conference on “China and the World in the 90s” on 3 June 1988, Mr Deng Xiaoping expounded, in relation to the pledge that even after the reunification under the Basic Law, Hong Kong would remain unchanged for 50 years, that:

“Why is it said that Hong Kong is to remain unchanged for 50 years? This is a basis for this, not just to calm public sentiments in Hong Kong, but also to take into account the close connection between the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong and the development strategy of China. It takes time for China to develop according to its strategy. Apart from the 12 years in this century, it may also need 50 more years in the next century. How can any changes be allowed in the next 50 years? There is one Hong Kong at this moment and we still need to create a few more “Hong Kong” in the Mainland. In other words, to realise the strategic development goals, China has to become even more open.” (Our translation)

Mr Deng Xiaoping’s remarks are not inevitably relevant to interpreting the Basic Law. However, in past discussions over constitutional issues, those in power liked to quote Deng’s remarks to justify their positions. If we use this as a metric, we can see from the above remarks that in fact even Mr Deng hoped that Hong Kong, which was still a British colony at that time, could assist in pushing for the creation a few more “Hong Kong” in order to promote a more open China. In other words, from the Mr Deng’s point of view, the implementation of “One Country, Two Systems” in Hong Kong is for Hong Kong to play a strategic role, in, to a certain extent, promoting “de-sinicisation” in China.

Thus, instead of making irresponsible remarks in Hong Kong, Chen Zuoer should work hard to familiarise himself with the Basic Law or even with the thoughts of Mr Deng Xiaoping. If Mr Chen’s half-ignorance is widely accepted and implemented in Hong Kong, this city may well suffer like a car that has been wrecked in a crash, with fatal consequences.